AMD Playstation 5 Pro GPU vs Intel Arc Pro B370 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for the AMD Playstation 5 Pro GPU and the Intel Arc Pro B370. The database shows zero benchmark entries for both parts, and the head-to-head comparison table is empty. As a result, no measured frame rates, compute scores, or synthetic test deltas exist to compare directly.

What the data does provide is the raw specification sheet for each GPU, which allows for a theoretical performance envelope comparison. The AMD Playstation 5 Pro GPU delivers 18.05 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel Arc Pro B370 delivers 6.144 TFLOPS. That puts the AMD part at roughly 2.94 times the raw FP32 throughput of the Intel part, a substantial gap driven by both shading unit count and clock behavior.

The shading unit disparity is stark: the AMD GPU features 3840 shading units, whereas the Intel Arc Pro B370 has 1280. Texture mapping units follow the same pattern, with 240 TMUs on the AMD side versus 40 on the Intel side. Render output units are 64 on the AMD GPU and 20 on the Intel GPU. These differences translate directly into fill rate figures: the AMD Playstation 5 Pro GPU reaches 150.4 GPixel/s and 564.0 GTexel/s, while the Intel Arc Pro B370 manages 48.00 GPixel/s and 96.00 GTexel/s.

The FP16 comparison shows a similar ratio. AMD lists 36.10 TFLOPS (2:1) against Intel's 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1), again a roughly 2.94 multiplier. Both parts use a 2:1 ratio for FP16, indicating a similar relationship between their FP32 and FP16 pipelines, but the absolute magnitudes are far apart.

Clock speeds tell a more nuanced story. The AMD GPU has a base clock of 2170 MHz and a boost clock of 2350 MHz. The Intel part has a base clock of just 300 MHz but a boost clock of 2400 MHz. While the Intel boost clock is actually 50 MHz higher than AMD's boost, the enormous base clock difference suggests the Intel part is designed for aggressive power management, likely spending most of its time near the lower end of that range. The AMD GPU's base clock is 2170 MHz, which is over 7 times higher than Intel's base, indicating a much more sustained performance profile.

Pixel rate and texture rate figures confirm that the AMD GPU holds a commanding lead in every throughput metric. The Intel Arc Pro B370's pixel rate is less than one-third of AMD's, and its texture rate is less than one-sixth. These are not marginal differences; they represent different performance classes entirely.

Both parts sit at the 50th percentile in the database's all-GPU ranking, but this is a consequence of having no benchmark data entered, not a statement of actual equivalence. The percentile field reflects the empty benchmark array, so it carries no comparative weight here.

Where Each One Wins

Without benchmark results, wins must be inferred from the specification differences recorded in the database.

The AMD Playstation 5 Pro GPU wins outright in raw compute, fill rate, memory bandwidth, and thermal design envelope. Its 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus delivers 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Arc Pro B370 uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth, which means its memory performance is not fixed and depends entirely on the host platform's memory configuration. For any workload that stresses memory throughput, the AMD GPU has an unquantifiable but structurally significant advantage.

The AMD GPU also wins on sustained clock behavior. Its base clock of 2170 MHz versus Intel's 300 MHz base clock indicates that the AMD part is built to maintain high performance continuously, whereas the Intel part's low base clock suggests brief boosts rather than sustained operation. This matters for long-duration workloads like rendering or compute tasks.

The Intel Arc Pro B370 wins in power efficiency and integration. Its TDP is 25 W, compared to 232 W for the AMD GPU. That is a 9.28 times difference in power draw. The Intel part is an IGP with no power connectors and a slot width of IGP, meaning it is integrated into a processor package and requires no separate cooling or power delivery. The AMD GPU is a discrete-class console GPU that requires a full system implementation with its own power budget.

The Intel part also wins on API support. It lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the AMD GPU lists DirectX as N/A and Vulkan 1.2. For applications that rely on the latest DirectX feature sets, the Intel Arc Pro B370 has explicit support where the AMD part has none recorded.

The Intel GPU also has 10 ray tracing cores, while the AMD GPU lists null for RT cores in the database. This suggests the Intel part has dedicated ray tracing hardware, whereas the AMD side's ray tracing capabilities are not documented in the recorded data.

Release timing favors the Intel part as well. The Intel Arc Pro B370 has a release date of 2026-01-26, while the AMD Playstation 5 Pro GPU was released on 2024-11-06. The Intel part is a newer design by roughly 14 months, though this does not automatically translate to performance superiority given the compute gap.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the AMD Playstation 5 Pro GPU than the Intel Arc Pro B370 in FP32 compute?

A: The AMD GPU delivers 18.05 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel Arc Pro B370 delivers 6.144 TFLOPS. This gives the AMD part approximately 2.94 times the raw FP32 throughput.

Q: What is the power consumption difference between the two GPUs?

A: The AMD Playstation 5 Pro GPU has a TDP of 232 W. The Intel Arc Pro B370 has a TDP of 25 W. The Intel part consumes about 10.7% of the AMD GPU's power budget, a 9.28 times difference.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Pro B370 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the database lists 10 ray tracing cores for the Intel Arc Pro B370. The AMD Playstation 5 Pro GPU does not have an RT core count recorded; the field is null.

Q: What memory configurations do the two GPUs use?

A: The AMD Playstation 5 Pro GPU uses 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Arc Pro B370 uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth, meaning its memory performance varies with the host platform.

Q: Which API versions does each GPU support?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B370 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD Playstation 5 Pro GPU lists DirectX as N/A, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.

Q: What are the clock speeds for each GPU?

A: The AMD Playstation 5 Pro GPU has a base clock of 2170 MHz and a boost clock of 2350 MHz. The Intel Arc Pro B370 has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. The Intel boost clock is 50 MHz higher, but its base clock is far lower.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every recorded specification field.

Process node: the AMD Playstation 5 Pro GPU uses a 4 nm process from TSMC. The Intel Arc Pro B370 uses a 3 nm process from Intel. The Intel node is one generation smaller, though the AMD part uses TSMC's foundry while Intel uses its own.

Transistor count and die size: the AMD GPU has 21,000 million transistors on a 279 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 75.3M per mm². The Intel part lists both transistors and die size as unknown, with no density recorded.

Memory: the AMD GPU has 16 GB of GDDR6 with a 256-bit bus and 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel part uses system shared memory, with system shared type and bus width, and system dependent bandwidth.

Shading units: AMD has 3840; Intel has 1280. TMUs: AMD has 240; Intel has 40. ROPs: AMD has 64; Intel has 20. RT cores: AMD has null; Intel has 10.

Clock speeds: AMD base is 2170 MHz, boost is 2350 MHz, memory clock is 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). Intel base is 300 MHz, boost is 2400 MHz, memory clock is system shared.

Fill rates: AMD pixel rate is 150.4 GPixel/s, texture rate is 564.0 GTexel/s. Intel pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s, texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s.

Compute: AMD FP32 is 18.05 TFLOPS, FP16 is 36.10 TFLOPS (2:1). Intel FP32 is 6.144 TFLOPS, FP16 is 12.29 TFLOPS (2:1).

TDP: AMD is 232 W; Intel is 25 W. Slot width: AMD is null; Intel is IGP. Power connectors: AMD is null; Intel is none. Bus interface: AMD is null; Intel is IGP.

Display outputs: AMD has 1x HDMI 2.1 and 1x USB Type-C. Intel is portable device dependent.

APIs: AMD lists DirectX as N/A, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.2. Intel lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4.

Dimensions: AMD is 386 mm length, 216 mm height, 89 mm width. Intel has no dimensions recorded.

Release date: AMD is 2024-11-06; Intel is 2026-01-26. Predecessor: AMD has none; Intel has HD Graphics-WM. Launch MSRP: AMD is 699 USD; Intel has no launch MSRP recorded.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Playstation 5 Pro GPU is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture, using the Viola chip. The Intel Arc Pro B370 uses the Xe3-LPG architecture with the Panther Lake chip. These are fundamentally different design philosophies.

RDNA 2.0 is a mature gaming-oriented architecture from AMD, designed for high-throughput rasterization and compute. The Xe3-LPG is Intel's low-power graphics architecture, intended for integrated use in mobile and embedded platforms. This explains the massive TDP difference: 232 W for the AMD part versus 25 W for the Intel part.

The AMD GPU is classified as a "Console GPU (Sony)" generation, indicating it is a custom part for a specific gaming console. The Intel part is classified as "Arc Graphics-WM (Panther Lake)", with a slot width of IGP, confirming its integrated nature.

The Intel Arc Pro B370 has 10 dedicated ray tracing cores, while the AMD RDNA 2.0 part has no RT core count recorded. This suggests the Intel architecture includes explicit hardware for ray traversal, while the AMD part's ray tracing approach is either absent or not documented in the database.

The process node difference is notable: TSMC's 4 nm for AMD and Intel's 3 nm for the Intel part. Both are advanced nodes, but Intel's is newer. The AMD die is 279 mm² with 21,000 million transistors, while Intel's die size and transistor count are unknown, likely due to the integrated nature of the part.

API support differences reflect architectural priorities. The Intel part supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, the latest versions in the database. The AMD part lists DirectX as N/A, which is typical for console GPUs that do not expose DirectX to developers, and only Vulkan 1.2.

The memory architecture is fundamentally different. AMD uses dedicated GDDR6 with a fixed 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. Intel uses system shared memory, meaning the GPU accesses the same memory pool as the CPU, with bandwidth dependent on the host system. This is a common trade-off for integrated GPUs, trading peak bandwidth for simplicity and cost.

The clock architecture also differs. AMD's base clock of 2170 MHz is close to its boost clock of 2350 MHz, indicating a stable, sustained operating point. Intel's base clock of 300 MHz with a boost of 2400 MHz shows a wide dynamic range, typical of integrated parts that idle at very low clocks and boost only when needed.

The FP16 to FP32 ratio is 2:1 for both parts, indicating similar half-precision throughput relationships. However, the absolute values are far apart: 36.10 TFLOPS for AMD versus 12.29 TFLOPS for Intel in FP16.

The AMD part is a discrete console GPU with physical dimensions of 386 mm by 216 mm by 89 mm, while the Intel part has no recorded dimensions because it is an IGP integrated into a processor package. This physical difference underscores the intended use cases: the AMD GPU powers a dedicated gaming console, while the Intel GPU serves as an integrated solution for portable devices.